Connect with us

Published

on

Men wearing military uniform walk along Red Square in front of St. Basil’s Cathedral in central Moscow on February 13, 2023.

Alexander Nemenov | Afp | Getty Images

The coming months will be critical in figuring out how Russia’s economy is holding up in the face of a new suite of sanctions, and for how long it can continue pouring money into its military assault on Ukraine.

Russia’s budget deficit hit a record 1.8 trillion Russian rubles ($24.4 million) in January, with spending growing by 58% from the previous year while revenues fell by more than a third. 

Industrial production and retail sales in December fell to their worst year-on-year contractions since the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic in early 2020, with retail sales dropping by 10.5% year-on-year while industrial production shrank by 4.3%, compared to a 1.8% contraction in November. 

Russia has yet to report its GDP growth figures for December, which are expected to be incorporated into full-year 2022 data slated for this Friday.

According to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the OECD, Russian GDP dropped by at least 2.2% in a best-case scenario in 2022 and by up to 3.9%, and is widely expected to contract again in 2023.

However, both the Russian finance ministry and the central bank maintain that all of this is within their models. 

Several unique circumstances and accounting technicalities go some way to explaining the scale of the January deficit figure, according to Chris Weafer, CEO of Moscow-based Macro Advisory.

The big drop in tax revenue was mostly accounted for by changes in the tax regime that kicked in at the beginning of January, the finance ministry claimed. Companies previously paid taxes twice per month, but now make one consolidated payment on the 28th of each month. 

Ukrainians believe they're fighting not just for themselves but for all nations' right to exist: IMF

The finance ministry suggested most of the January tax payments had not yet been accounted for by Jan. 31 and will instead feed into the February and March figures.

Weafer also highlighted a change in the Russian oil tax maneuver that came into force in January and is expected to iron out in the coming months, while the nature of Russian public spending allocation means it is heavily concentrated at the end of the year, widening the fiscal deficit.

Christopher Granville, managing director of global political research at TS Lombard, noted two further factors distorting the most recent deficit figures.

Firstly, this was the first print since the sanctioning states’ embargo on Russian crude imports went into force on Dec. 5.

“Before that date, Europe had been loading up with Urals crude, then straight to zero, so the Russian seaborne export trade had to be re-routed overnight,” Granville told CNBC. 

“Obviously a lot of preparations for that re-routing had been made (Russia buying up tankers, getting more access to the ‘shadow’ or ‘dark’ fleet etc), but the transition was bound to be bumpy.”

Russia has become a pariah state. What's next?

The actual Urals price dived as a result, averaging just $46.8 per barrel during the period from mid-December to mid-January, according to the Russian finance ministry. This was the tax base for much of January’s oil and gas-related federal budget revenues, which also suffered from the fading of a revenue windfall in the fourth quarter from a hike to the natural gas royalty tax.

The finance ministry also flagged massive advance payments for state procurement in January, which totaled five times those of January 2022.

“Although they don’t say what this is, the answer is perfectly obvious: pre-payment to the military industrial complex for weapons production for the war,” Granville said.

How long can the reserves last?

For the month of January as a whole, the average Urals price edged back up to $50 a barrel, and both Granville and Weafer said it would be important to gauge the impact on Urals price and Russian exports as the full impact of the latest round of sanctions becomes clearer.

Sanctioning countries extended bans to bar vessels from carrying Russian-originated petroleum products from Feb. 5, and the International Energy Agency expects Russian exports to plummet as it struggles to find alternative trading partners.

The export price for Russian crude is seen as a central determinant for how quickly Russia’s National Wealth Fund will be drawn down, most notably its key reserve buffer of 310 billion Chinese yuan ($45.5 billion), as of Jan. 1.

Russia has ramped up its sales of Chinese yuan as energy revenues have declined, and plans to sell a further 160.2 billion rubles’ worth of foreign currency between Feb. 7 and Mar. 6, almost three times its FX sales from the previous month.

However, Russia still has plenty in the tank, and Granville said the Kremlin would stop depleting its yuan reserves well before they were fully exhausted, instead resorting to other expedients.

Retaining domestic power high in Putin's agenda, says former German ambassador to Russia

“A flavour of this is the idea floated by MinFin to benchmark oil taxation on Brent rather than Urals (i.e. a material hike in the tax burden on the Russian oil industry, which would then be expected to offset the blow by investing in logistics to narrow the deficit to Brent) or the proposal from First Deputy Prime Minister Andrey Belousov that major companies flush with 2022 profits should make a ‘voluntary contribution’ to the federal budget (mooted scale: Rb200-250bn),” Granville said.

Several reports last year suggested Moscow could invest in another wave of yuan and other “friendly” currency reserves if oil and gas revenues allow. Yet given the current fiscal situation, it may be unable to replenish its FX reserves for some time, according to Agathe Demarais, global forecasting director at the Economist Intelligence Unit.

“Statistics are state secrets these days in Russia especially regarding the reserves of the sovereign wealth funds — it’s very, very hard to know when this is going to happen, but everything that we’re seeing from the fiscal stance is that things are not going very well, and so it is clear that Russia must draw down from its reserves,” she told CNBC.

“Also, it has plans to issue debt, but this can only be done domestically so it’s like a closed circuit — Russian banks buying debt from the Russian state, etcetera etcetera. That’s not exactly the most efficient way to finance itself, and obviously if something falls down then the whole system falls down.”

Early rounds of sanctions following the invasion of Ukraine set out to ostracize Russia from the global financial system and freeze assets held in Western currencies, while barring investment into the country.

Sanctions not about ‘collapse’ of Russian economy

The unique makeup of the Russian economy — in particular the substantial portion of GDP that is generated by state-owned enterprises — is a key reason why Russian domestic life and the war effort appear, at least at face value, to be relatively unaffected by sanctions, according to Weafer.

“What that means is that, in times of difficulty, the state is able to put money into the state sectors, create stability and subsidies and keep those industries and services going,” he said. 

“That provides a stabilizing factor for the economy, but equally, of course, in good times or in recovery times, that acts as an anchor.”

Ukraine war: Moscow's invasion likely to inflict long-term economic decline on Russia

In the private sector, Weafer noted, there is far greater volatility, as evidenced by a recent plunge in activity in the Russian auto manufacturing sector. 

However, he suggested that the government’s ability to subsidize key industries in the state sector has kept unemployment low, while parallel trading markets through countries such as India and Turkey have meant the lifestyles of Russian citizens have not been substantially impacted as yet.

“I think it’s increasingly dependent on how much money the government has to spend. If it has enough money to spend providing social supports and key industry supports, that situation can last for a very, very long time,” Weafer said.

“On the other hand, if the budget comes under strain and we know that the government can’t borrow money, that they’re going to have to start making cuts and making choices between military expenditure, key industry supports, social supports, and that’s what situation may change, but right now, they have enough money for the military, for key industry supports, for job subsidies and for social programs.”

As such, he suggested that there is little pressure on the Kremlin from the domestic economy or the population to change course in Ukraine for the time being.

Diminished technology access

Demarais, author of a book on the global impact of U.S. sanctions, reiterated that the most significant long-term damage will come from Russia’s receding access to technology and expertise, in turn causing a gradual attrition of its main economic cash cow — the energy sector.

The aim of the sanctions onslaught, she explained, was not a much-touted “collapse of the Russian economy” or regime change, but the slow and gradual attrition of Russia’s ability to wage war in Ukraine from a financial and technological perspective.

“The technology gap, those sectors of the economy that rely on accessing Western technology in particular, or Western expertise, in many areas are definitely going to degrade and the gap between them and the rest of the world is going to widen,” Weafer said.

The Russian government has begun a program of localization and import substitution alongside companies in so-called friendly countries, with a view to eventually creating a new technological infrastructure over the next several years.

“Even the optimists say that’s probably the end of the decade before that can be done, it’s not a quick fix,” Weafer explained.

“I think even government ministers are saying by the time you put everything in place with training and education, facilities etc., it’s a minimum five-year program and it’s probably more like seven or eight years before you can start to deliver engagement, if you get it right.”

A spokesperson for the Russian finance ministry was not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNBC.

Continue Reading

Environment

The messy middle, hybrid semis, and century old tech comes to trucking

Published

on

By

The messy middle, hybrid semis, and century old tech comes to trucking

On today’s fleet-focused episode of Quick Charge, we talk about a hot topic in today’s trucking industry called, “the messy middle,” explore some of the ways legacy truck brands are working to reduce fuel consumption and increase freight efficiency. PLUS: we’ve got ReVolt Motors’ CEO and founder Gus Gardner on-hand to tell us why he thinks his solution is better.

You know, for some people.

We’ve also got a look at the Kenworth Supertruck 2 concept truck, revisit the Revoy hybrid tandem trailer, and even plug a great article by CCJ’s Jeff Seger, who is asking some great questions over there. All this and more – enjoy!

Prefer listening to your podcasts? Audio-only versions of Quick Charge are now available on Apple PodcastsSpotifyTuneIn, and our RSS feed for Overcast and other podcast players.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

New episodes of Quick Charge are recorded, usually, Monday through Thursday (and sometimes Sunday). We’ll be posting bonus audio content from time to time as well, so be sure to follow and subscribe so you don’t miss a minute of Electrek’s high-voltage daily news.

Got news? Let us know!
Drop us a line at tips@electrek.co. You can also rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, or recommend us in Overcast to help more people discover the show.


If you’re considering going solar, it’s always a good idea to get quotes from a few installers. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them. 

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Trump’s war on clean energy just killed $6B in red state projects

Published

on

By

Trump’s war on clean energy just killed B in red state projects

Thanks to Trump’s repeated executive order attacks on US clean energy policy, nearly $8 billion in investments and 16 new large-scale factories and other projects were cancelled, closed, or downsized in Q1 2025.

The $7.9 billion in investments withdrawn since January are more than three times the total investments cancelled over the previous 30 months, according to nonpartisan policy group E2’s latest Clean Economy Works monthly update. 

However, companies continue to invest in the US renewable sector. Businesses in March announced 10 projects worth more than $1.6 billion for new solar, EV, and grid and transmission equipment factories across six states. That includes Tesla’s plan to invest $200 million in a battery factory near Houston that’s expected to create at least 1,500 new jobs. Combined, the projects are expected to create at least 5,000 new permanent jobs if completed.

Michael Timberlake of E2 said, “Clean energy companies still want to invest in America, but uncertainty over Trump administration policies and the future of critical clean energy tax credits are taking a clear toll. If this self-inflicted and unnecessary market uncertainty continues, we’ll almost certainly see more projects paused, more construction halted, and more job opportunities disappear.”

Advertisement – scroll for more content

March’s 10 new projects bring the overall number of major clean energy projects tracked by E2 to 390 across 42 states and Puerto Rico. Companies have said they plan to invest more than $133 billion in these projects and hire 122,000 permanent workers.

Since Congress passed federal clean energy tax credits in August 2022, 34 clean energy projects have been cancelled, downsized, or shut down altogether, wiping out more than 15,000 jobs and scrapping $10 billion in planned investment, according to E2 and Atlas Public Policy.

However, in just the first three months of 2025, after Trump started rolling back clean energy policies, 13 projects were scrapped or scaled back, totaling more than $5 billion. That includes Bosch pulling the plug on its $200 million hydrogen fuel cell plant in South Carolina and Freyr Battery canceling its $2.5 billion battery factory in Georgia.

Republican-led districts have reaped the biggest rewards from Biden’s clean energy tax credits, but they’re also taking the biggest hits under Trump. So far, more than $6 billion in projects and over 10,000 jobs have been wiped out in GOP districts alone.

And the stakes are high. Through March, Republican districts have claimed 62% of all clean energy project announcements, 71% of the jobs, and a staggering 83% of the total investment.

A full map and list of announcements can be seen on E2’s website here. E2 says it will incorporate cancellation data in the coming weeks.

Read more: FREYR kills plans to build a $2.6 billion battery factory in Georgia


To limit power outages and make your home more resilient, consider going solar with a battery storage system. In order to find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. They have hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and you share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisers to help you every step of the way. Get started here. –trusted affiliate link*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla delays new ‘affordable EV/stripped down Model Y’ in the US, report says

Published

on

By

Tesla delays new 'affordable EV/stripped down Model Y' in the US, report says

Tesla has reportedly delayed the launch of its new “affordable EV,” which is believed to be a stripped-down Model Y, in the United States.

Last year, Tesla CEO Elon Musk made a pivotal decision that altered the automaker’s direction for the next few years.

The CEO canceled Tesla’s plan to build a cheaper new “$25,000 vehicle” on its next-generation “unboxed” vehicle platform to focus solely on the Robotaxi, utilizing the latest technology, and instead, Tesla plans to build more affordable EVs, though more expensive than previously announced, on its existing Model Y platform.

Musk has believed that Tesla is on the verge of solving self-driving technology for the last few years, and because of that, he believes that a $25,000 EV wouldn’t make sense, as self-driving ride-hailing fleets would take over the lower end of the car market.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

However, he has been consistently wrong about Tesla solving self-driving, which he first said would happen in 2019.

In the meantime, Tesla’s sales have been decreasing and the automaker had to throttle down production at all its manufacturing facilities.

That’s why, instead of building new, more affordable EVs on new production lines, Musk decided to greenlight new vehicles built on the same production lines as Model 3 and Model Y – increasing the utilization rate of its existing manufacturing lines.

Those vehicles have been described as “stripped-down Model Ys” with fewer features and cheaper materials, which Tesla said would launch in “the first half of 2025.”

Reuters is now reporting that Tesla is seeing a delay of “at least months” in launching the first new “lower-cost Model Y” in the US:

Tesla has promised affordable vehicles beginning in the first half of the year, offering a potential boost to flagging sales. Global production of the lower-cost Model Y, internally codenamed E41, is expected to begin in the United States, the sources said, but it would be at least months later than Tesla’s public plan, they added, offering a range of revised targets from the third quarter to early next year.

Along with the delay, the report also claims that Tesla aims to produce 250,000 units of the new model in the US by 2026. This would match Tesla’s currently reduced production capacity at Gigafactory Texas and Fremont factory.

The report follows other recent reports coming from China that also claimed Tesla’s new “affordable EVs” are “stripped-down Model Ys.”

The Chinese report references the new version of the Model 3 that Tesla launched in Mexico last year. It’s a regular Model 3, but Tesla removed some features, like the second-row screen, ambient lighting strip, and it uses fabric interior material rather than Tesla’s usual vegan leather.

The new Reuters report also said that Tesla planned to follow the stripped-down Model Y with a similar Model 3.

In China, the new vehicle was expected to come in the second half of 2025, and Tesla was waiting to see the impact of the updated Model Y, which launched earlier this year.

Electrek’s Take

These reports lend weight to what we have been saying for a year now: Tesla’s “more affordable EVs” will essentially be stripped-down versions of the Model Y and Model 3.

While they will enable Tesla to utilize its currently underutilized factories more efficiently, they will also cannibalize its existing Model 3 and Y lineup and significantly reduce its already dwindling gross margins.

I think Musk will sell the move as being good in the long term because it will allow Tesla to deploy more vehicles, which will later generate more revenue through the purchase of the “Full Self-Driving” (FSD) package.

However, that has been his argument for years, and it has yet to pan out as FSD still requires driver supervision and likely will for years to come, resulting in an extremely low take-rate for the $8,000 package.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Trending